Refuting the Arguments of Christianity

8/14/2019 Refuting the Arguments of Christianity

1/25

Refuting The

Christian ArgumentsConcerning Sunday

Observances

I was reading a popular Christian Forums several years

back, and several articles were posted to back up Sunday

Observance over Seventh Day observance (commanded by

God in the fourth commandment). I found these articles so

typical of Christian thinking, I decided to refute one of

them point by point. The following is the article in it's

entirety, followed by my responses to each major point.

THE FIRST DAY VS. THE SABBATHhttp://www.newtestamentchurch.org/OPA/Articles/1991/07/OPA19910702.h

tm

July 1, 1991 Issue

by Irvin Barnes

The first day of the week is a special and distinguished day

because Jesus was resurrected on the first day, the churchwas established on the first day and Christians are taught to

assemble to break bread and give of their means on the first

day of the week.

Mark 16:9, says "Now when Jesus was risen early the first


2/25

day of the week." This is proof enough that Christ came

forth from the tomb on the first day, However, those who

observe the Sabbath claim that Christ "was risen" (past

tense) and point that the tomb was empty when the womenarrived on the first day of the week, therefore, they say

Christ was risen in the afternoon of the 7th day or on the

Sabbath.

Jesus said he would be raised on the third day (Luke

24:46). While walking on the road to Emmaus, Cleopas

told Christ "today is the third day," since Jesus was

delivered, condemned to death, and crucified (Lk 24:13-21). Verse 13 declares that the journey to Emmaus was on

the same day the women went to the tomb. So Jesus was

raised on the day the women went to the tomb, the same

day Cleopas went to Emmaus which was the third day since

Jesus had died. What day was it? Luke 24:1 says the

women went to the tomb on the first day of the week. The

women did not go to the tomb on the Sabbath day nor was

the Sabbath the third day following the death of Jesus.

Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week.

The church of Christ had its beginning on the first

Pentecost day following the resurrection of Christ. Please

see Acts chapter 2. Pentecost was one of five Jewish

celebrations commanded in Lev. 23. Beginning at a specific

Sabbath, the Jews were to number 7 Sabbaths complete.

Seven times 7 equals 49 days. The day following the 7th

Sabbath was the "fiftieth" day which is the exact meaning

of the word Pentecost. Since Pentecost or the "fiftieth day"

followed a Sabbath or 7th day, the day of Pentecost fell on

the first day of the week. The church had its beginning on


3/25

the first day of the week (Acts 2:1).

Christians are taught by command (Heb 10:25) and by

example (Acts 20:7) to commune on the first day of the

week. The first day is distinguished from all the other daysof the week because of worship performed on this day that

must not be performed on any other day.

Paul commanded a collection to be taken on the first day of

the week (1st Cor 16:1-3). Those who practice Sabbath

keeping claim this was a special collection and would not

be continued after Paul came to take it to Jerusalem. Please

note that the passage does not say "that there be no morecollections ever again, after I come," but says simply that

they were to take a collection each first day so the funds

would be ready when Paul or others arrived. Nothing is

said to prove that they would not continue the first day

collection every first day of the wee after Paul departed

Corinth for Jerusalem. The first day is distinguished by this

act of giving in the assembly on each first day of the week.THE SABBATH IS GONE

The first day of the week is not a Christian Sabbath. There

is no Sabbath in God's plan for the New Testament age of

the world. Because of greed the people of old asked,

"When will the Sabbath be gone?" After rebuking them for

their covetousness, the prophet Amos answered, "And it

shall come to pass in the day, saith the Lord God, that I will

cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the

earth in the clear day," Amos 8:4-9. This was fulfilled

when Jesus died on the cross. "Now from the sixth hour

there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour,"


4/25

Matthew 27:45. Paul explains that Jesus took away the law

contained in ordinances, blotting out the ordinances by

nailing them to the cross (Eph 2:14-15 & Col 2:14-16).

Hosea 2:11 tells of a time when Israel's feast days (yearlyfestivals), her new moons (monthly observances), and her

Sabbaths (weekly observances), would cease. Paul explains

that since Jesus has died, "Let no man judge you in meat or

in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or

of the Sabbath days," Col 2:14-16. The holyday refers to

the yearly feasts, the new moon to the monthly feasts and

the Sabbath refers to the weekly observances. Hosea saidthese observances, including the Sabbath, would cease.

Paul says at the death of Christ they did cease.

When Christ died on the cross, did he take away the ten

commandments or only the book of the law? He took away

both! In Romans 7, Paul points out that Christians are

loosed from the law, dead to the law, free from the law, and

delivered from the law. He illustrates our freedom from thelaw by quoting one of the ten commandments in verse 7,

"Thou shalt not covet." Second Corinthians 3, also proves

that the ten commandments written on stone were done

away by, and had no glory in comparison to, the more

glorious law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus. Nine of the

10 commandments are taught again in the New Testament

in the following places: James 2:11, Rom 13:9, Eph 4:25,

1st. Thes 4:6, Eph 6:1-2, 1st. Cor 10:7 and Eph 4:29. The

command to observe the 7th day cannot be found in the

New Testament. The Sabbath is gone. It was taken away in

the cross of Christ.


5/25

The following are my answers to each of Irivin Barnes'

major points of argument:

THEIR ARGUMENT:

The first day of the week is a special and distinguishedday because Jesus was resurrected on the first day,

the church was established on the first day andChristians are taught to assemble to break bread and

give of their means on the first day of the week.

Response:

I'm always surprised when Protestants use Catholicteachings like this one to support their beliefs. Messiah was

already risen when they arrived at the tomb at dawn on

Sunday, this is one of the few facts upon which all four

gospel accounts agree. They also outline how Messiah said

clearly he'd be in the tomb three days and three nights, and

if he died on Friday like Christianity teaches and rose

sunday morning like they say, then he was only in the tomb

2 nights!

THEIR ARGUMENT:Mark 16:9, says "Now when Jesus was risen early the

first day of the week." [ This is proof enough thatChrist came forth from the tomb on the first day,

Response:

Notice what Irvin does to this verse. Let's read the actual

verse:

"Now when Yahshua was risen early

the first of the week, he appeared first


6/25

to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he

had cast seven devils."

Notice in the version above it says "first of the week," thisis because the word DAY was inserted by the King James

translators and does not appear in other versions. The word

"day" is in italics in the authorized King James.

Yet, even if it did say "day" this verse in no wise proves

that Messiah rose at dawn, nor does it prove he rose on the

first day of the week. You have to ignore all the other

scriptural accounts in the gospels to come away with thisidea (which is what Irvin conveniently does in his

research). You see, Irvin fails to understand that the first

day of the week for the Hebrew begins at sundown on

saturday. Actually, I think he conveniently ignores this.

"Early on the first day" is most definately Saturday

Sundown, ask any Hebrew who keeps sabbath. It's been

this way for thousands of years! This verse Irvin quotes

actually proves that Messiah arose "early on the first of the

week" which is Saturday sundown!

THEIR ARGUMENT:

However, those who observe the Sabbath claim thatChrist "was risen" (past tense) and point that the tomb

was empty when the women arrived on the first day of

the week, therefore, they say Christ was risen in theafternoon of the 7th day or on the Sabbath.

Response:

What Irvin fails to do here is tell his readers that the gospel

accounts all agree on one fact, and that is, when the women


7/25

arrived at the tomb, it was already empty, and an angel told

them "he's risen" (past tense). He also grossly

misrepresents the teachings of Sabbath keepers, by saying

they teach Messiah was risen on the afternoon of theseventh day. This is just not so. Sabbath keepers (most)

traditionally understand that Messiah arose at the END of

the 7th day, when the first of the week was beginning. He

had to stay in the tomb to fulfill the 3 days and 3 nights

prophecy (and since he actually died on wednesday

afternoon, the preparation day for the "High" sabbath, (or

yearly sabbath), he stayed in the tomb until the Sabbath day

was ending and the first day was beginning.

THEIR ARGUMENT:

Jesus said he would be raised on the third day (Luke24:46).

My Response:

Interestingly enough, this is true, however Yahshua also

said he would be raised "after" 3 days, and he furtherexpounded by saying he'd be in the tomb 3 days and 3

nights.

Mark 8: 31

"And he began to teach them, that the

Son of man must suffer many things

and be rejected of the elders, and of the

chief priests, and scribes, and be killed,

and after three days rise again."


8/25

Let common sense rule for just a moment. If Messiah died

on Friday afternoon, and rose on Sunday morning, is that

three days? That's only a day and a half people. A day and

a half! Catholics created "inclusive reconning" wherebythey count Friday as one day, and Saturday as one day, and

Sunday as one day, yet, they claim he rose at the beginning

of the day on Sunday, so how can they possibly count it as

a day? If your travel agent promised you three days and

three nights vacation and booked you from Friday

afternoon, to return on Sunday, you'd sue! Yet, you accept

without question the Catholic's doctrine, which is designed

to make the worship of Messiah align with the worship ofthe Sun God (on "Sun" day).

So, was Messiah contradicting himself and scripture by

saying both, "on the third day" and "after three days?" Not

if you understand that he arose at the end of the third day,

when it was a "grey" area whether you say "on the third

day" or "after 3 days." If he rose at the tail end of the third

day, when the first day of the week was beginning, then

BOTH statements "on the third day" and "after three days"

can be true. However, if he rose at dawn of the third day,

the phrase "after" three days can NEVER be true!

This is only one contradiction that arises when you believe

the "inclusive reconning" and that Messiah died Friday

afternoon and rose on Sunday at dawn.

Messiah clearly said he would be in the tomb for "three

days and three nights."

Matthew 12: 40


9/25

"For as Jonah was three days and

three nights in the whale's belly; so

shall the Son of man be three days andthree nights in the heart of the earth."

If Messiah died on Friday, and rose on Sunday dawn, even

if you count friday as the first day, and Sunday as the third,

he was still only in the tomb 2 nights, (Friday night, and

Saturday night). Scripture cannot be broken. The teaching

of "the Lord's Day" doctrine cannot possibly be true

without ignoring almost everything that Messiah said abouthis own resurrection.

THEIR ARGUMENT:While walking on the road to Emmaus, Cleopas told

Christ "today is the third day," since Jesus was

delivered, condemned to death, and crucified (Lk24:13-21).

Response: Even if this conversation took place on the same

day Yahshua supposedly arose (Sunday) it does not prove

anything. Why? Because if Messiah died on Wednesday

afternoon, near the end of the day, when the passover lamb

was being prepared for the High Sabbath, the disciples

would not count Wednesday as a day. So, Wednesday

sundown to Thursday sundown is one day, Thursday

Sundown to Friday Sundown is two days, and FridaySundown to Saturday sundown is three days. If Cleophus

was speaking sometime Sunday morning, or early

afternoon, indeed 4 days had not yet passed. He would not

say "this is the fourth day since Messiah was crucified,"


10/25

because only 3 days had passed. He would not have said

"it's been 4 days" until after Sunday sundown, until the sun

went down on Sunday it was still only three whole days.

THEIR ARGUMENT:Verse 13 declares that the journey to Emmaus was on

the same day the women went to the tomb. So Jesuswas raised on the day the women went to the tomb, the

same day Cleopas went to Emmaus which was thethird day since Jesus had died.

Response: If Messiah died on Friday afternoon like they

say, and rose at Sunday dawn, would Cleophus have said"this is the third day since the crucifixion? Let's count the

days. Friday sundown to Saturday Sundown (1 day),

Saturday Sundown to Sunday Sundown (2 days). How

could Cleophus have said "this is three days since

crucifixion" if he was speaking on the day of the

ressurection (Sunday) like Irvin maintains, and Messiah

died on Friday like Christians maintain? Cleophus wouldn'thave said "this is the third day since" seeing that only 1 full

day had passed (friday sundown to saturday sundown) and

they were still working on the second day. (Saturday

sundown to Sunday sundown) As you can see, when you

take into account that Hebrews count the beginning of days

at Sundown, there is no way the scriptural accounts can line

up with the Roman teachings concerning the crucifixion

and the Resurrection. No wonder for over a thousand years

Rome tried to exterminate the Jews, the Hebrew ways

expose the lies of Catholic Dogma, right down to their

every day living!


11/25

THEIR ARGUMENT:

What day was it? Luke 24:1 says the women went tothe tomb on the first day of the week. The women did

not go to the tomb on the Sabbath day nor was theSabbath the third day following the death of Jesus.

Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week.

Response:

Now, this is a very interesting statement indeed. Notice

how emphatically Irvin says these women wouldn't have

gone to the tomb on the Sabbath. Shouldn't we be asking

him why not? He's already maintained that the sabbath daywas done away in Messiah, and claimed that the followers

of Messiah didn't keep the Sabbath. So what would stop

them from going to the tomb on the Sabbath? This is the

most comical of all the Christian arguments, they claim the

followers of Messiah did not keep Sabbath, and do not keep

Sabbath, then when speaking of Messiah's followers

visiting the tomb they always say "and of course theywouldn't go to the tomb on Sabbath!" Thus they completely

contradict themselves.

Yet, he's right, they wouldn't go to the tomb on the Sabbath

for two reasons. Reason number one, it was the Sabbath,

and they kept the Sabbath. Reason number two, Messiah

said he'd rise "after" three days "and" three nights, and the

Sabbath day was the third day. They knew he wouldn't riseuntil at least the end of the Sabbath day. So why didn't they

go there right at dusk on Saturday? Decent Israeli women

did not venture out after dark (only ladies of the evening

did this, which is why they are called ladies of the


12/25

evening).

THEIR ARGUMENT:

The church of Christ had its beginning on the first

Pentecost day following the resurrection of Christ.Please see Acts chapter 2. Pentecost was one of five

Jewish celebrations commanded in Lev. 23. Beginningat a specific Sabbath, the Jews were to number 7

Sabbaths complete.

Response:

Here Irvin goes again, completely contradicting himself.The entire thrust of this article is to prove that the "law of

Moses" is done away, and that the first Christians didn't

follow the law of Moses, now, here he admits openly that

the first Christians "were all gathered together in one place"

to observe the "Pentecost" which is an observance found in

the law of Moses! It never dawns on Irvin (or other

Christians who make this particular argument) how this

contradicts everything they assert, for here we havescriptural evidence that not only did the early followers of

Messiah KEEP sabbath, they kept Pentecost as well. As far

as his counting of the days, well, it's nonsense I'm not even

going to go into it.

THEIR ARGUMENT:Christians are taught by command (Heb 10:25) and

by example (Acts 20:7) to commune on the first day of

the week.

Response:

Here is the most astounding contradiction of all! In the


13/25

beginning of the article Irvin asserts that Christians are no

longer under "laws of observances" to observe one day

above another, and that "Christ has set us free of law" now,

he backpedals and establishes a new law of observancethat, as he puts it, is "commanded." The law of "Sunday

observance." He can't seem to make up his mind whether

we must observe one day above another or not, nor can he

make up his mind as to whether we are "free from law" or

not. He says we are free from "Moses' law," then says you

are in bondage to a "Sunday observance law." (Which is

actually Catholic law). Therein lies the crux of the sin, they

take away God's law and put in it's place the Roman law ofSunday observance. When protestants make this argument

they reveal themselves as the "closet" Catholics that they

really are.

Let's look at the scriptures he uses to assert this bogus

claim:

Hebrews 10:25"Not forsaking the assembling of

ourselves together, as the manner of

some; but exhorting and so much the

more, as you see the day approaching."

Nowhere does this text even remotely mention "first day"observance at all! Irvin simply has no scripture to back up

his claim that we are "commanded" to observe first day

observances.

Let's look at the other quote he gives:


14/25

Acts 20: 7

"And upon the first day of the week

when the disciples came together tobreak bread, Paul preached to them,

ready to depart on the morrow; and

continued his speech until midnight."

Yes, this does mention the first day of the week, but what

does it say they gathered for? To break bread which is a

phrase meaning to "eat dinner together." Are we thencommanded to "eat dinner" when we assemble on Sunday

to our church meetings? Then why did Paul say not to do

this, but to eat in your own houses?

1 Corinthians 11: 20-22

"20 When you come together therefore

into one place, this is not to eat theLord's supper.

21 For in eating every one takes before

his own supper: and one is hungry, and

another is drunken.

22 What? Have you not houses to eat

and to drink in? or despise you thecongregation of God, and shame them

that have not? What shall I say to you?

Shall I praise you in this? I praise you


15/25

not."

Clearly, the "assembling" of yourselves together is not to

"break bread." So, in Acts, they weren't assembling to

honor a new Sabbath observance, the disciples of which

this chapter speaks merely had a habit of eating dinner

together on the first day! This shows how desperate the

"Lord's Day" advocates are to find scriptures that back up

their teachings. They find one verse in acts that shows the

disciples getting together on the first day to "break bread"

and turn this into a so called rock solid proof that they

changed the Sabbath to the first day. Yet, they ignore allthe other verses in Acts that show the disciples honoring

the Sabbath!

ACTS 2: 12-14

"12 Then they returned to Jerusalem

from the mount called Olivet, which is

from Jerusalem a sabbath day'sjourney.

13 and when they were come in, the

went up into an upper room, where

abode both Peter, and James, and

John, and Andrew, Philip, and thomas,Bartholomew, and Mattew, James the

son of Alphaeus, and simon Zelotes,

and Judas the brother of James.


16/25

14 These all continued with one accord

in prayer and supplication, with the

women, and Mary the mother ofYahshua, and with his brethren."

ACTS 13:14

"14 but when they departed from

Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia,

and went into the synagogue on the

Sabbath day, and sat down."

ACTS 16:13

"13 And on the Sabbath we went out of

the city by a river side, where prayer

was wont to be made; and we sat down

and spoke to the women which resortedthere."

ACTS 17: 1- 2

"1 Now when they had passed through

Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came

to Thessalonica, where was asynagogue of the Jews:

2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in

to them, and three Sabbath days


17/25

reasoned with them out of the

scriptures,"

THEIR ARGUMENT:first day is distinguished from all the other days of the

week because of worship performed on this day thatmust not be performed on any other day.

Response:

The first of the two scriptures here quoted (to support the

above statement) doesn't even mention the first day

observance, and in second quote the "worship performed"

on that day according to the verse was "breaking of bread,"

and breaking of bread is not worship according to scripture.

Never was, never will be. It's only classified as worship in

Catholicism, because they have established the Holy

Eucharist, which Protestants claim to reject as worship, yet,

here's a protestant defending the notion that "breaking of

bread" is worship! Me thinks the Catholics have pulled afunny trick on the silly Protestants by getting them to

accept the "Lord's Day" Dogma.

THEIR ARGUMENT:Paul commanded a collection to be taken on the first

day of the week (1st Cor 16:1-3).

Response:What does this verse actually say?

"Upon the first of the week let every one of you lay

by him in store."


18/25

Again, here is another place where the KJV translators

insert the word "day" in an attempt to make it appear as

though the early church thought Sunday was some special

day. In all actuality, these verses do not demonstrate theimportance of Sunday, but instead prove beyond doubt that

the early church observed Seventh Day Sabbath. In these

verses, Paul is not ordering a "collection" but a "storage."

It's telling them to begin storing food at the beginning of

the week, to be collected on Sabbath to give to the poor

(which is in fact a custom that goes back to Moses' law). I

almost laughed at this argument, really.

The reason he instructed them to begin storing on the first

day is because the collection was taken on the seventh day,

then the storage began all over again the very next day.

THEIR ARGUMENT:

Those who practice Sabbath keeping claim this was aspecial collection and would not be continued after

Paul came to take it to Jerusalem.Response:

Not so. This is a very old trick of "Christian Apologists," in

which they create an argument supposedly put forth by the

opposition, an argument which is easy to refute and that has

never been offered once by those with whom the Christian

is debating. He puts an argument in the mouth of Sabbath

keepers everywhere then refutes the argument.

I have not noticed Sabbath keepers saying this "storage and

collection" ordered by Paul is a "special collection on the

first day of the week," The simple fact is, this collection


19/25

doesn't take place on the first day of the week. On the first

day of the week there is no collection at all. The first day is

the day in which Paul said to begin "gathering in store by

the individual," to be collected later (on the seventh day ofthe week, the Sabbath day). The "gathering in store" only

"begins" on the first day, it's not limited "to" the first day!

Why does it begin on the first day? Because on the Seventh

day is when the food that has been "stored" all week is

collected, and on the first day the "storage" begins all over

again. Irvin's entire argument is just nonsense, and it's

based on a purely religious view, coming from someone

steeped in Christian religious teaching, (Roman teaching).

THEIR ARGUMENT:

Please note that the passage does not say "that therebe no more collections ever again, after I come," but

says simply that they were to take a collection each

first day so the funds would be ready...

Response:No actually what it says is that they should store it up, so

that the person collecting doesn't have to sit around and

wait while they go scrambling to find food to give to the

poor. This is almost humorous.

THEIR ARGUMENT:Nothing is said to prove that they would not continue

the first day collection every first day of the week after

Paul departed...

Response:

Yes, and nothing is said about a collection on the first day,


20/25

it says the "storage" begins on the first day, and the

collection is later. Furthermore, nothing is said here about

the storage being only on the "first day" it says "upon" the

first day let everyone begin to store up for the poor."THEIR ARGUMENT:

The first day is distinguished by this act of giving inthe assembly on each first day of the week.

Response:

No, actually the seventh day is distinguished by when the

storage begins, for common sense dictates that this storagewould begin the very next day after the collection, and

indeed that's the first day, since the collection takes place

on the seventh day. Well did Yahshua say of these, "they

have eyes to see but they cannot see." Well did the

Apostles write of them, "ever learning but never able to

come to the knowledge of the truth."

THEIR ARGUMENT:THE SABBATH IS GONE

The first day of the week is not a Christian Sabbath.There is no Sabbath in God's plan for the New

Testament age of the world. Because of greed thepeople of old asked, "When will the Sabbath be

gone?"

Response:

Notice the spin Irvin puts on this scripture. He fails to see

that the Israelites were rebuked for wanting the Sabbath

GONE, and yet, that is exactly what Irvin has attempted to

do, make the Sabbath go away. Yet, it will never go away.


21/25

God said it is a "perpetual sign" meaning it never ends!

Unless God is a liar!

My bet on who's lying should be obvious, and I'll give you

a hint, it's not God!

THEIR ARGUMENT:After rebuking them for their covetousness,

Response:

Again, they were rebuked not for covetousness, but for

wanting the Sabbath to be gone!

THEIR ARGUMENT:the prophet Amos answered, "And it shall come to

pass in the day, saith the Lord God, that I will causethe sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the

earth in the clear day," Amos 8:4-9. This was fulfilledwhen Jesus died on the cross. "Now from the sixth

hour there was darkness over all the land unto the

ninth hour," Matthew 27:45. Paul explains that Jesustook away the law contained in ordinances, blottingout the ordinances by nailing them to the cross (Eph

2:14-15 & Col 2:14-16).

Response:

Here Irvin misses the entire significance of the prophecy

and it's fulfillment. The people of Israel wanted the SabbathDay to go away, and Amos told them, "not only is it never

going away, one day it will become perpetual, and they will

keep the Sabbath every day, there's coming a Sabbath day

that never ends." He also repeats the same contradiction as


22/25

I mentioned before. Earlier he has stated that Sunday (first

day) worship is now COMMANDED by scripture, now

here he is saying that Christ nailed the ordinances regarding

upon which day we are to worship. Christians, when theysay the Sabbath law is done away, really mean that God's

Sabbath law was done away with and the Roman Catholic

Sabbath Law was INSTITUTED! It's a changing of God's

law to man's law (and guess what that is exactly what the

prophets said the antichrist would do "think to change times

and laws).

Messiah ushered in a day when we keep the Sabbath, notjust once a week, but every single day, and we all press into

that rest, in which we cease from our own works and our

own doings, and do the will of the Father!

My answer to Irivin's statement "The Sabbath is gone," is

the same as Amos' answer to Israelites. Not only is the

Sabbath NOT gone, we are coming to a MILLENIAL

Sabbath, that will last one thousand years, and after that, oninto eternity. Notice that when Israel asked "when will

Sabbath end" Amos never once says "after Messiah

comes." You would think if Messiah was going to do away

with Sabbath, Amos would certainly have answered by

telling them of Messiah.

THEIR ARGUMENT:

Hosea 2:11 tells of a time when Israel's feast days(yearly festivals), her new moons (monthlyobservances), and her Sabbaths (weekly observances),

would cease.

Response:


23/25

Yes, so does Daniel, when speaking of the BEAST!

"He shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and for

the overspreading of abomination he shall make it

desolate."

"He shall take away the daily sacrifice, and place the

abomination that makes desolate."

THEIR ARGUMENT:

Paul explains that since Jesus has died, "Let no man

judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an

holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days,"Col 2:14-16. The holyday refers to the yearly feasts,the new moon to the monthly feasts and the Sabbath

refers to the weekly sabbath.

Response:

Not so! Irvin took this entirely out of context, for the author

of Col 2 was not talking about the Holy Sabbath that was

instituted by God, but was instead talking about theobservances instituted by man, how do I know? Because

the author said so.

Colossians 2: 22

"(which all are to perish with the using:) after the

commandments and doctrines of men?"

In fact, this exhortation to not let others judge youaccording to sabbath days is more aptly applied to the

"Sunday obervance" doctrine, for Sunday observance

commands were instituted by men, whereas the Sabbath by

God! In other words, the author of Colossians was saying,


24/25

don't let them make new Sabbaths, and observances and

rules and put them on you! Which is precisely what the

Christian Religion has done. You might say, but

Christianity doesn't judge you for keeping the Sabbath!Yes they do, and all one has to do is discuss this issue with

most Christians and they will offer the proof of this

judgment. Most Christians will say that those who abandon

Christ's Law to try to follow the rules and regulations of

Moses' Law are "fallen from grace," and they will quote to

you Galatians 5:1-6; 2:16.

The rest of the arguments offered by Irvin can easily berefuted by saying this:

Truly, if you keep the law by having it written in your heart

and in your mind, you, indeed are free from the law, for

you no longer have to observe it by observation, but can

observe it in your daily lives. We no longer keep the law by

reading, memorizing, and attempting to apply law, for the

Holy Spirit moves in and we surrender to him, and we keepthat same Moses law by the power of Love. In other words,

we, like Yahshua fulfill the law.

Only the transgressors are under the law. Yet, if I throw out

the law, and say that I don't have to obey it, then I thwart

the ministry of the Holy Spirit who was sent to lead and

guide us into perfect obedience. Indeed I destroy the very

ministry of Messiah, who died to send us the Holy Spirit,

so that this law they say has been done away could be

written in our hearts and minds and live forever, we

becoming a living example and testimony of the

righteousness of the law!


25/25

All who teach that we can live as we want to live, and that

the ten commandments are not for today, are of their father

the devil, for he sinned from the beginning and they desire

only to use the grace of God as an occasion to the flesh, tocontinue in their sin, and to never please God.

Documents

Refuting the Arguments of Christianity